SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.14 número3Nuevos sumadores de alto desempeño utilizando una estructura lógica alternativaCircuito WTA en modo de corriente y baja complejidad, basado en inversores Quasi-FG en CMOS índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • No hay artículos similaresSimilares en SciELO

Compartir


Computación y Sistemas

versión impresa ISSN 1405-5546

Comp. y Sist. vol.14 no.3 México ene./mar. 2011

 

Artículos

 

Una arquitectura multi–agente para apoyar el uso de comunidades de práctica en las organizaciones

 

A Multi–Agent Architecture to Support Communities of Practice in Organizations

 

Juan Pablo Soto Barrera1, Aurora Vizcaíno Barceló2*, Javier Portillo Rodríguez2** y Mario Piattini Velthuis2***

 

1 Departamento de Matemáticas Universidad de Sonora Hermosillo, México. E mail: jpsoto@gauss.mat.uson.mx

2 Grupo de Investigación ALARCOS Universidad de Castilla – La Mancha Ciudad Real, España (aurora.vizcaino@uclm.es*, javier.portillo@uclm.es**, mario.piattini@uclm.es***)

 

Artículo recibido en Marzo 09, 2009
Aceptado en Octubre 22, 2009

 

Resumen

Este artículo presenta una arquitectura multi–agente diseñada para dar apoyo a las comunidades de práctica en organizaciones preocupadas por el intercambio de conocimiento. El principal objetivo de esta propuesta es facilitar el intercambio de conocimiento en empresas donde sus empleados están organizados en comunidades. Además de esto, este trabajo trata de apoyar a los miembros de la comunidad al momento de decidir en qué o quién confiar. Para esto, se propone un modelo de confianza basado en cuatro factores que las personas de manera consciente o inconsciente suelen considerar al momento de decidir si confían o no en un objeto o fuente de conocimiento.

Palabras Clave: Agentes inteligentes, Gestión del Conocimiento en Organizaciones, Confianza, Arquitecturas Multi–agente.

 

Abstract

This paper presents a two layer multi–agent architecture designed to support communities of practice in organizations which are concerned about knowledge sharing. The main goal of this proposal is, therefore to facilitate knowledge exchange in organizations whose employees are organized into communities.

Keywords: Intelligent Agents, Knowledge Management in Companies, Trust, Multi–agent architecture.

 

DESCARGAR ARTÍCULO EM FORMATO PDF

 

Agradecimientos

Este trabajo ha sido parcialmente financiado por el proyecto FABRUM (PPT–430000–2008–063), MELISA (PAC08–0142–3315), ENGLOBAS (PII2109–0147–82–35), Junta de Comunidades de Castilla–La Mancha, Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (Dirección General de Investigación)/Fondos Europeos de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) en España y al Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) en México.

 

Referencias

1. Atkinson–Abutridy, J. & Ferreira–Cabrera, A. (1998). Un enfoque integrado para disminuir la sobrecarga en la búsqueda de información utilizando un agente adaptativo guiado por interacciones dialógicas en lenguaje natural. Computación y Sistemas, 2(1), 14–23.         [ Links ]

2. Barber, K. & Kim, J. (2001). Belief revision process based on trust: simulation experiments. Autonomous Agents '01 Workshop on Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies. Montreal, Canada, 1–12.         [ Links ]

3. Caballero, A., Botia, J. & Skarmeta, A. (2006). A new model for trust and reputation management with an ontology based approach for similarity between tasks, Multiagent System Technologies. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4196, 172–183.         [ Links ]

4. Carbó, J., Molina, M. & Dávila, J. (2003). Trust management through fuzzy reputation. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 12(1), 135–155.         [ Links ]

5. Carter, J., Bitting, E., & Ghorbani, A. (2002). Reputation formalization for an information–sharing multi–agent system. Computational Intelligence, 18(4), 515–534.         [ Links ]

6. Chiu, C.–M., Hsu, M–H. & Wang, E. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872–1888.         [ Links ]

7. Davenport, E. (2001). Knowledge management issues for online organisations: 'communities of practice' as an exploratory framework. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 61–75.         [ Links ]

8. De Long, D. & Fahey, L. (2000). Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management. Academy of Management Executive, 14(4), 113–127.         [ Links ]

9. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by 'collaborative learning'?. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative–Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches (1–19). United Kingdom: Emeral Group Publishing Limit.         [ Links ]

10. du Plessis, M. (2008). The strategic drivers and objectives of communities of practice as vehicles for knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Information Management, 28(1), 61–67.         [ Links ]

11. Felder, R. & Silverman, L. (1988). Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674–681.         [ Links ]

12. Ferguson, I. (1992). TouringMachines: an architecture for dynamic, rational, mobile agents. Phd Thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.         [ Links ]

13. Fuentes, R., Gómez–Sanz, J. & Pavón, J. (2004). A sociological framework for multi–agent systems validation and verification. Conceptual Modeling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3289, 458–469.         [ Links ]

14. Gebert, H., Geib, M., Kolbe, L. & Brenner, W. (2003). Knowledge–enabled customer relationship management: integrating customer relationship management and knowledge management concepts. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(5), 107–123.         [ Links ]

15. Geib, M., Braun, C., Kolbe, L. & Brenner, W. (2004). Measuring the utilization of collaboration technology for knowledge development and exchange in virtual communities. 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'04), Big Island, Hawaii, Vol. 1, 1–10.         [ Links ]

16. Hahn, J. & Subramani, M. (2000). A framework of knowledge management systems: issues and challenges for theory and practice. Twenty First International Conference on Information Systems, Atlanta, USA, 302–312.         [ Links ]

17. He, W., Qiao, Q. & Wei, K–K. (2009). Social relationship and its role in knowledge management systems usage. Information & Management, 46 (3), 175–180.         [ Links ]

18. Hillery, G. (1955). Definitions of community: areas of agreement. Rural Sociology, 20(2), 111–123.         [ Links ]

19. Hinds, P. & McGrath, C. (2006). Structures that work: social structure, work structure and coordination ease in geographically distributed teams. 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Bannf, Alberta, Canada, 345–352.         [ Links ]

20. Imbert, R. (2005). Una arquitectura cognitiva multinivel para agentes con comportamiento influido por características individuales y emociones propias y de otros agentes. Tesis de doctorado, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, España.         [ Links ]

21. Koh, J. & Kim, Y–G. (2004). Knowledge sharing in virtual communities: an e–business perspective. Expert Systems with Applications, 26(2), 155–166.         [ Links ]

22. Maes, P. (1994). Agents that reduce work and information overload. Communications of the ACM, 37(7), 31–40.         [ Links ]

23. McDermott, R. (2002). Measuring the impact of communities. Knowledge Management Review, 5(2), 26–29.         [ Links ]

24. Miller, J. & Zhichao, Y. (2004). A cognitive–based mechanism for constructing software inspection teams. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(11), 811–825.         [ Links ]

25. Ridings, C., Gefen, D. & Arinze B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3–4), 271–295.         [ Links ]

26. Sabater, J. & Sierra, C. (2001). Regret: a reputation model for gregarious societies. Fourth Workshop on Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies. Montreal Canada, 61–69.         [ Links ]

27. Sabater, J. (2003). Trust and reputation for agent societies. PhD Thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona Spain.         [ Links ]

28. Sánchez, J., López, C. & Schnase, J. (1998). Chrysalis: agentes de usuario en la construcción de bibliotecas digitales botánicas. Computación y Sistemas, 2(2–3), 95–103.         [ Links ]

29. Sher, P. & Lee, V. (2004). Information Technology as a facilitator for enhancing dynamic capabilities through knowledge management. Information & Management, 41(8), 933–945.         [ Links ]

30. Sierra, C. & Debenham, J. (2005). An information–based model for trust. 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS'05), Utrecht, Netherlands, 497–504.         [ Links ]

31. Soto, J.P., Vizcaíno, A., Portillo–Rodríguez, J. & Piattini, M. (2007). A three level multi–agent architecture to foster knowledge exchange. 19th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), Boston, USA, 565–569.         [ Links ]

32. Soto, J.P., Vizcaíno, A., Portillo–Rodríguez, J., Rodríguez–Elias, O–M. & Piattini, M. (2008). A prototype to recommend trustworthy knowledge in communities of practice. Third International Conference on Software and Data Technologies (ICSOFT 2008), Vol. PL/DPS/KE, Porto Portugal, 321–326.         [ Links ]

33. Ushida, H., Hirayama, Y. & Nakajima, H. (1998). Emotion model for life like agent and its evaluation. AAAI'98/IAAI'98 Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Tenth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference. Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 62–69.         [ Links ]

34. Vizcaíno, A., Soto, J.P., Portillo, J. & Piattini, M. (2007). A multi–agent model to develop knowledge management systems. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS). Big Island, Hawaii, 203b.         [ Links ]

35. Wang, Y. & Vassileva, J. (2003). Trust and reputation model in peer–to–peer networks. 3rd International Conference on Peer–to–Peer Computing, Linkpings, Sweden, 150–157.         [ Links ]

36. Wasserman, S. & Galaskiewicz, J. (1994). Advances in social networks analysis: Research in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc.         [ Links ]

37. Wasko, M. & Faraj, S. (2000). "It is what one does": why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2–3), 155–173.         [ Links ]

38. Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246.         [ Links ]

39. Wooldridge, M. & Ciancarini, P. (2001). Agent–oriented software engineering: The state of the art. First international workshop, AOSE 2000 on Agent–Oriented Software Engineering, Secaucus, NJ, USA, 1–28.         [ Links ]

40. Zacharia, G., Moukas, A. & Maes, P. (1999). Collaborative reputation mechanisms in electronic marketplaces. 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS'99). Maui, Hawaii. Vol. 8, 8026.         [ Links ]

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons